Most Helpful Customer Reviews
27 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Good overview of Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean basin, March 15, 2006
This review is from: The Oxford History of Medieval Europe (Paperback)
According to George Holmes, editor of _The Oxford History of Medieval Europe_, "western civilization was created in medieval Europe." Much of modern thought and culture, including the modern nation state, ideas of popular sovereignty, modern parliaments, banking, universities that award degrees, and the literary form of the novel, has its origins in the struggles and society of the medieval centuries. Since 1500 nothing comparable to the shattering and rebirth of the West that happened between the years 400 and 900 has occurred, nor has arisen anything as fundamentally novel and distinct as the culture that grew up around the cathedrals, universities, royal courts, and commercial cities between the years 900 and 1500. This book is an anthology and is divided into eight sections; an editor's forward and an editor's postscript, both by Holmes, and six chapters, each by a different author and each concerned with a different era and region of medieval Europe (chapters focus on either the Mediterranean basin or northern Europe beyond the Alps and the Pyrenees). In addition to the text there were a number of plates depicting medieval art and around twenty very helpful maps throughout the book. Chapter one was on the transformation of the Roman Mediterranean into that of the early medieval era (400 to 900) and was by Thomas Brown. Main themes are the rise and long, slow decline of the Byzantine Empire and what Brown called the "age of invasions," the upheaval in the region caused by the arrival of Germanic peoples (notably the Lombards, the most devastating), the Slavs, the Persians (a revitalized Persian empire, though eventually defeated by Emperor Heraclius, did lead to a failure of the Byzantines to reestablish authority over Italy and the Balkans), and the Arabs. Islam had phenomenal success due to the struggle between the Persians and the Byzantines, the abilities and dedication of its soldiers, the political prowess of the early caliphs, the simple appeal of its doctrines, and the political and religious alienation of Byzantium's subjects. Also of great importance was the growing power and independence of the pope (thanks in large part due to the Franks, beginning with Charlemagne), vital in creating a distinctive Western Europe, different politically, ecclesiastically, and culturally from Byzantium (other factors in fostering a distinct Western identity were the collapse of land trade routes and the growing linguistic cleavage). Chapter two dealt with northern Europe in the Dark Ages (400 to 900) and was written by Edward James. In this period the north found "its own voice," as thanks to the spread of Christianity (and writing) northerners began to produce their own written record, allowing the north to emerge "into the light of history" for the first time, as Romanization (the spread of writing, ideas of law and government, and Greek and Latin knowledge) continued ironically after the collapse of the actual Roman Empire. As with the preceding chapter much of this section dealt with the invasions of various peoples, largely Germanic (James preferred the term migrations). James also discussed the social structure of the various barbarian kingdoms, the importance of the kin-group as a social and legal institution, the evolution of Latin in the region, and the impact of the Vikings. Chapter three was written by David Whitton and focused on the society of northern Europe in the High Middle Ages (900-1200). Major themes were what Whitten called the "lineaments of power," the complex nature of feudalism; the intricate web of duties, obligations, vassalage, and tenure between kings, nobility, and the men under them and the medieval arms race of castle building and producing expensively equipped knights, caused not by Viking or Magyar invasions (which had ended) or a decline in the economy (which was recovering quite well) but by the anxiety of lords to consolidate, maintain, and even expand their power and domains. Also covered was the evolution of monasticism, the nature of papal authority in northern Europe, and the twelfth-century Renaissance. Chapter four (by Rosemary Morris) was titled "northern Europe invades the Mediterranean," an apt name as it chronicled the intervention of northern European powers into Italy, lands of the "Byzantine Commonwealth" (lands under the authority of Constantinople or within its powerful cultural orbit), and the Islamic world (notably in Spain - the beginnings of the Reconquista - and of course the Crusades). I found the comparison between Christian settlers and their society and their treatment of non-Christian subjects in Spain and in Outremer - the Christian conquered areas of the Holy Land - quite fascinating. A fantastic chapter, Morris covered the decline of the Abbasid caliphate in Baghdad, the rise of independent Muslim states, the subsequent reunification of Islam in the twelfth century as a direct result of Christian involvement in the Middle East, and the polarization of Muslim and Christian religious attitudes (away from earlier more tolerant ones) particularly in Spain. Also covered were issues of church reform and the development of long distance trade. Chapter five was by Peter Denley and focused on the Renaissance Mediterranean. Too much was covered to adequately summarize here, but I found Denley's assertions that the early voyages of exploration by Vasco da Gama and others had deep medieval routes (though of course their results produced a profound break with the middle ages) and however revolutionary humanist and Renaissance ideas were, their origins (particularly two elements, chivalric and religious in nature) were firmly rooted in medieval culture. Chapter six dealt with civilization in northern Europe from 1200 to 1500 and was by Malcolm Vale. Major themes included the evolution of the ceremonies and symbols of royalty, the rise and fall of various royal dynasties (that got a little dry), the evolution of the papacy and monasticism, and a discussion of chivalry and of medieval literature. I found the book interesting and a good overview. Some parts were more interesting than others but all in all I found it a valuable read. I would have liked more detail on some issues but it was intended to be fairly broad in scope.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Thorough some places, spotty others, August 19, 2007
This review is from: The Oxford History of Medieval Europe (Paperback)
I am not a historian, and I read this trying to fill in holes in my background. It is not for the faint of heart -- paragraphs run on for pages, and a certain willingness to plow into deep details is assumed. My major reservation about the book is its leaving out major British events -- surprising for an Oxford history. Alfred the Great is mentioned in one sentence. William's conquest of England in another sentence. No mention at all is made of the Battle of Hastings, or even the Magna Carta!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Not great, but not terrible either, November 25, 2009
This review is from: The Oxford History of Medieval Europe (Paperback)
I've been looking around for a while for a good single volume history of the middle ages, and I thought that this would be a good candidate. After finishing it, I think I'll keep looking. Let me briefly sum up why this book is not exceptional, and why it isn't as bad as some previous reviewers imply. As far as the history goes, it's generally accurate. The chapter about Europe's invasion of the Mediterranean was the only one that I noticed significant inaccuracies in; the contract between Christian and Arabic culture was extremely exaggerated. Rosemary Morris is under the common impression that the Muslims during the Middle Ages were extremely advanced and tolerant peaceful multiculturalists who were suddenly invaded by Western Christians who were ignorant, intolerant, and reveled in violent slaughter. This depiction is extremely inaccurate, as (1) the Muslims were just as (or more) violent (they provoked the "invasion" by the Christians by taking the land from the Christians, who were attempting to reconquer land that had belonged to Christendom for centuries), (2) the superior culture the Muslims supposedly possessed was neither superior (it was significantly behind the West in nearly every field besides classical philosophy) nor their own (the ofter cited exampled of Muslim advances in mathematics, medicine, etc. were the product of the heretical Christian groups, Jews, and Persians whom they conquered), and (3) the Muslims were just as prone to slaughter all the inhabitants of cities they conquered (especially the Turks), destroy churches in their territory, and periodically butcher Christian monks and pilgrims as the crusaders were to do the same to the Muslims. The Western Christians were neither so bad as Morris' chapter makes them out to be, nor were the Muslims as good as she claims. Of course, her claims are mirrored in most histories since Gibbon, Voltaire, etc. made their revisionist, anti-Catholic histories, so she's hardly to blame for mirroring a great deal of scholarly work. The problem isn't so much that she does, but that she tends to emphasize these mistakes more than most authors, and it's quite irksome. The main problem with the history is not what is incorrect, but what is included and what is left out. Several of the authors of this book do not posses a skill which is critical for history writers; the ability to determine what information needs to be included and what information is superfluous. While adding interesting anecdotal stories adds greatly to the enjoyability of history books, and is essential to popular histories (which this book seems to be trying to be), the writers of this book seem to be trying to do that, but end up giving useless bits of information that are neither interesting nor relevant to the history. I'm not sure if they're supposed to be inside jokes, or if the authors really think we care about some of the obscure details they throw in, but there really isn't space for things like that in a 500 page history that covers the entire history of the Middle Ages. They're already pressed for space without wasting it on worthless details. On the flip side, there is an appalling lack of detail concerning English history. I'm not sure if the authors were intentionally trying to avoid showing a preference for England (writing an Oxford history and all) and overcompensated, or what, but the lack of discussion of English history in a history of Europe in the Middle Ages is really quite shocking. I would also have liked to see a bit more discussion of Byzantine history. It's not nearly so neglected as English history, but it certainly could have used a bit more detail. I thought at first that they were trying to focus mostly on Western Christendom (e.g. Catholic Christendom), but then they went off on a massive discussion of the history of Arabic, Turkish, and Persian civilization, so I'm not sure why Byzantium wasn't covered in very much detail. Finally, I would have liked to see a bit more discussion of theology and philosophy. Many of the historical events discussed are unintelligible unless one understands what was going on in the fields of theology and philosophy. Surely some discussion of the theological divergence between the West and East is in order in a book like this? All of this would be forgivable, however, if the book were fun to read. I'm willing to tolerate small historical inaccuracies or oversights made by authors of popular histories; it's the price we pay for their rhetorical skills. The prose in this book, however, is atrocious. Historians are frequently accused of being horrific bores, and this book simply cements this stereotype. This book is certainly not fun to read by any stretch of the imagination. Some portions of the book are so muddled it is difficult to understand what point the author is trying to make. Poor prose is excusable in academic publications; it's the price we pay for their scholarship. This book is, however, neither a scholarly success nor an enjoyable read. The history aspect is mediocre, and does not even begin to make up for the poor writing abilities demonstrated by all of the authors. A few of the authors are tolerable, but for the most part it is positively dreary. Brown and Vale are particularly dull. I have no doubt that they are excellent professors and lecturers, but their writing skills leave much to be desired. I wouldn't recommend this book, but I gave it three stars because I don't know what other book to recommend it its place. A previous reviewer recommend Belloc's Crisis of Civilization, but, while it is a brilliant book, it is not really a history of the Middle Ages, and spends only 75ish pages on the whole period. Belloc's is a far superior book, but if you want to learn about the Middle Ages, it's not really ideal. This book is not great by any stretch of the imagination, but if you're really interested in learning about the Middle Ages, I guess it's not the worst place to start.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
